Crazydude1337
Chieftain
DESTROY THEM. They always have the smallest military, same with the their country size. Most of the time, they are backwards, and if you are more backwards than them, it's a real embarrassment. 
If you ever see the arabs in a game...
- Thread starter Crazydude1337
- Start date
Crazydude1337
Chieftain
The Germans are a challenge. They are backwards, but have a large military. Mounted Warriors are best for the challenge.
Same goes with Aztecs and Americans.
CELTICEMPIRE
Zulu Conqueror
The Arabs are actually a good Civ to play as, In the early game, but by the late middle ages, I find them to be practically useless, as their expansionist trait and their UU becomes obsolete.
Hey! They've done just fine in RSG1. I'm not going to start singing their praises, but the Ansar is not a horrible UU unlike, say the American UU. Oh no, this thread is going to collapse into a which UU is better argument! Theov, cover your eyes!
creamcheese
Spreading since 1990
The arabs are mediocre at best really, I recently was singing the praises of the ansar in RSG1, but their traits are not very strong after ansars go obsolete. The ansar keeps them from being bottom tier, but they are only average at best.
Plus they're pink, which makes it difficult to take them seriously. I've played one game as the Arabs: I used the Asnars to take over a continent, and that gave me the power base to take over the rest of the world.
darski
Regent in Training
My problem with the Arabs is the leader. I don't cotton to any man who pimps his 6 yr old daughter for political power. Turns my stomach. I have to find some other LH for them
jtb1127
Deity
They should at least be green.
anothercivguy
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3
I don't like playing as the Arabs, their UU is really a cheaper Rider with less defence (so you have to lug around pikemen with them to defend them, slowing them down a lot 
), expansionist is useless in my opinion (horsemen are good scouts, and popping barbarians from huts at least gives combat experience), religious is good, but it can't pick Arabia back up 
), expansionist is useless in my opinion (horsemen are good scouts, and popping barbarians from huts at least gives combat experience), religious is good, but it can't pick Arabia back up
jtb1127
Deity
I don't like playing as the Arabs, their UU is really a cheaper Rider with less defence (so you have to lug around pikemen with them to defend them, slowing them down a lot
Completely agree
creamcheese
Spreading since 1990
I don't like playing as the Arabs, their UU is really a cheaper Rider with less defence (so you have to lug around pikemen with them to defend them, slowing them down a lot
If you are defending them with pikes you are using them incorrectly really. You should be striking hard and fast, without concern for defense. Speed kills in Civ3. If you let your enemy have more turns to build military, your victory will be that much slower, and you will et more war weariness, etc. Ansars, (and ansar armies, even better) are really a pretty good UU.
Also, expansionist huts are only part of its' benefits, it is better for early contacts and trading on Pangaea maps. Still a weak trait though.
CELTICEMPIRE
Zulu Conqueror
I don't like playing as the Arabs, their UU is really a cheaper Rider with less defence (so you have to lug around pikemen with them to defend them, slowing them down a lot
Arabia is very similar to the Iroquois in vanilla. When I still played vanilla, I used the Iroquois all the time, they were deadly with their UU. The advantage of the Iroquois is that their UU actually has an advantage. Mounted Warriors are like quicker swordsmen, that, even though they have less defense, can retreat. Arab Ansars are at a disadvantage in defense, heck, a warrior if it's lucky could take one out. The speed is not that useful, considering the fact that Chinese riders have the same speed and 3 defense, the Ansars aren't worth the small production time difference.
Ansars speed can be helpful but you have to watch out for the defensive. I don't see how this is that different from the Mounted Warrior. If you can take the city you can move defensive units in on the roads after the city is taken. Or you can attack and then retreat an extra space.
I'm not saying the Ansars are awesome, they're not. But they're OK if they're used wtih some care. You can't really compare Ansars to Chinese Riders. Chinese Riders are a premier UU.
Not to mention China has some great Civ traits while the Arabs well . . . no so much IMO. But the Ansar is at least is not totally useless as a UU. An extra movement point is a rather nice bonus and it comes at descent time to trigger a GA. Does require researching a non-required tech, but that's the same for the Chinese, Ottomans, etc.
IMO it is not the UU that sinks the Arabs. Its the crummy trait combo. And they're pink . . . err . . . light red.
WWTVICTOR
Webroamer
The Arabs (AI) seldom expands, being a single/double-city civ is not something new to me.
Beside the Arabs, the Turks do have a similar situation...
How come the Muslim countries are not aggrestive in this game?
Beside the Arabs, the Turks do have a similar situation...
How come the Muslim countries are not aggrestive in this game?
tR1cKy
taking over the world
Thanks for the tip, but i always destroy every other civilization i get in contact with, so this case is already covered 
darski
Regent in Training
Progressive dhimmitude!
Verarde
Pondering Wearing A Hat
Usually, the Arabs are always behind, and I always find them annoying because of that, so I wipe 'em out. If I do see the Aztecs near me, I immediately put them on the "To Be Destroyed" list.
In my games Monty always puts himself on the "To Be Destroyed" list. It never fails that I get an early DOW from Monty regardless of power levels. Sometimes I just think the guy is suicidal.
Similar threads
